Posted
by
CowboyNeal
on Wednesday August 11, 2004 @03:18PM
from the bring-on-the-penguins dept.

Saeed al-Sahaf writes "According to Groklaw and the German publication Heise (it's in German, of course) Munich's mayor Christian Ude has held a press conference, in which he said that the bidding process for the switch from Windows to Linux will go forward as originally planned, despite patent issues. InfoWorld (in English), quotes Bernd Plank, a spokesman for Munich town hall, saying that he expected that the administration would take a maximum of 'two to three weeks' to decide whether the EU's Directive on software patents could affect the city's plan to switch to Linux, and that would be no 'dramatic setback.'" We reported this earlier as well, but now that it's making the rounds again in English, more of us can read it without resorting to Babelfish.

Before you bring up some of the standard arguments in defense of software patents, please read the FAQ [ffii.org]. There is a lot more good analysis in that section [ffii.org]. For an easier to understand example of how software patents affect real world applications - a big reason many small businesses oppose them - look at the webshop [ffii.org] demo.

All they're doing is re-opening the bidding process. Not the actual migration.

From TFA:

Mayor Ude, who said he's been thinking it over for a few days, says there will be a legal study completed by Autumn concerning the migration, and if it looks safe, they will go forward and meanwhile the bidding begins.

With any luck, this will crystallise the issues surrounding software patents more clearly in Euro MPs minds and make them think about more than Microsoft et al's bottom line. Indeed, looks like Munich is really pushing that bit:

He also announced that the city is going to request a legal study on the question of what consequences the EU-directive on the patentability of "computer-implemented inventions" will have in the current version of the Council of Ministers's proposed law.

"I'm not a fan of software patents, but if I did spend good money in getting one, it was made useless/unenforcable, and I didn't get a refund, I think I'd be rather pissed off about it."

Then you should have read Article 52 of the EPC which explicitly excludes software patentability. The companies that have been granted software patents by the EPO are mostly the same companies now lobbying for legislation to make valid their patents. They knew the score. They have gambled. They will lose. Tough.

fine, I mis-analyzed the situation, and took it as a standard game of hit-the-leader and responded as I would to any such remark, I still don't think it deserves the ratings it got though. My apologies.

Don't know. MS gave a ca. 50% rebate when GNU/Linux came into play. As a customer, I would feel ripped off, and I can well understand that one decides not to want to have to do anything with this vedor in the future.

However, money was not so much involved in the decision. The study and decision papers are online [muenchen.de]. After the rebate offered, MS was the cheaper solution in the short term, but Munich weighed independence of public data and long-term saves more heavily